"Just moments ago, our Software Engineers were able to get this sorted, and you should not experience this issue any more.

"Please let us know otherwise.

"Thank you all for your patience and understanding while we were looking into this."

I can't see a sorry anywhere, which brings me on to the question of compensation - what will EA do? I'll try and find out.

The other question is what caused this? One commenter in the EA Answers HQ thread claimed to have been on the phone to EA Support, which confirmed the BF1943 outage was a result of an "attack" at the beginning of the month.

"I still love the game [BF1943]," Eurogamer tipster Etienne told me, "and will always love the game. I feel as if a company this size should be held more accountable for the servers because they actually have the revenue and resources to dedicate to fixing this problem.

"As opposed to the flood of EA vitriol on the forums, I am very grateful that a company this large published this game because I don't think it would still be up and running if it was not owned by such a large corporation."

"Me, my daughter and all the people I see regularly play three-to-seven days a week. It is an easy game to jump into for 20-30 minutes or binge on for several hours. It doesn't take as much time to get onto a server as something like [Battlefield: Bad Company 2] or [Battlefield 3].

"I played Bad Company 2 about a year before B3 launched. I played B3 and 1943' simultaneously after B3 launched but about six months later, B3 fatigue set it and I've only gone back sporadically a couple of times and never for more than a couple of days. I haven't stopped playing '43 since 2010."

Besides this extended outage, Etienne said Battlefield 1943 had been more or less "completely stable" for almost three years.

Bertie is a senior staff writer, which doesn't mean he's old, although he is, a bit. He's part of the furniture here and reports on all kinds of things, the stranger the better. He's a bit odd but then who isn't? @Clert on Twitter.